The appellant, a registered massage therapist, appealed his conviction for sexual assault against a client.
He argued the trial judge provided insufficient reasons, misapprehended evidence, and erred in assessing credibility and the defence of mistaken belief in communicated consent.
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding the trial judge improperly used the complainant's prior police statement and absence of embellishment to bolster her credibility, and failed to make necessary factual findings regarding the appellant's evidence and whether he took reasonable steps to ascertain consent.
A new trial was ordered.
